hillbillypharmacist:Fox News legal analyst Jeanine Pirro said the First Amendment prohibited government from preventing the establishment of religion - not prohibited government from the establishment of a religion.

That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

Thats the first thing that caught my eye too. But I have to say it's flawless mental gymnastics. Perfect 10!

hillbillypharmacist:Fox News legal analyst Jeanine Pirro said the First Amendment prohibited government from preventing the establishment of religion - not prohibited government from the establishment of a religion.

That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

Don't hang out on the Politics tab much, I take it.

Cythraul:She explained that courts ordered religious displays at public buildings to be removed "because we listen now to the less than 1 percent in society that feels this way."

I think the constitution was set up to protect the rights of all people in the country, not just 99 percent of them. I may be wrong.

It was set up to protect the straight, white Christians, men more than women. Haven't you read your (Texas) history books?

hillbillypharmacist:Fox News legal analyst Jeanine Pirro said the First Amendment prohibited government from preventing the establishment of religion - not prohibited government from the establishment of a religion.

That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

Read a little bit farther:

"But the interesting thing about this is that the First Amendment has the Establishment Clause and it says there is no way that you can interrupt the establishment of a religion ...

Coco LaFemme:There is more concentrated stupid on Fox News than anywhere else on the planet.

This. It's such a huge joke to anyone with half a brain. And I'm sure the executives are smart enough to know this, but as long as they can make a lot of money playing to an audience of idiots and the uninformed, they will continue to laugh their way to the bank.

ArkAngel:Cythraul: She explained that courts ordered religious displays at public buildings to be removed "because we listen now to the less than 1 percent in society that feels this way."

I think the constitution was set up to protect the rights of all people in the country, not just 99 percent of them. I may be wrong.

I just find it amusing that now it's the opposite side of Farkers defending the "1%"

/lol

Except, it isn't "1%" like Gretchen the cheerleader says either. I think there was some poll that at least a 1/3 of people under 30 now self identify as "Non-religious", and that isn't even counting other religions as well.

And just because people "didn't complain about it" when you were a kid doesn't mean something wasn't "wrong". I'm sure there were people who said 'Nobody "complained" about having slaves when I was a kid" as well... doesn't mean it wasn't right to get rid of slavery.

Decades ago, there were a lot more communities that were very "closed" off.... literally everyone in the town was probably Christian, so, even if the Courthouse lawn had a nativity scene, yes, nobody was "offended", but, that doesn't mean it was "right" for them to put it on a courthouse lawn.

Here should be the rule for putting something of a religious nature on public/government property: "If someone else put an equivalent thing from another religion in the same place, would I be offended?" If the answer is "Yes", then, you shouldn't put yours there.

Seems to me that these people who are offended that other people are now using their communities public facilities need to become Amish and go into their own little "bubble communities" that don't allow anyone else in.

She explained that courts ordered religious displays at public buildings to be removed "because we listen now to the less than 1 percent in society that feels this way." [citation needed]

1) Christians are not 99% of the population2) You are aware that there are Christians that are against using government property for religious displays, even their own?3) The US is a Republic, not a Democracy.

impaler:She explained that courts ordered religious displays at public buildings to be removed "because we listen now to the less than 1 percent in society that feels this way." [citation needed]

1) Christians are not 99% of the population

To be fair, she wasn't just counting "non-Christians". She was specifically counting people who get butthurt about religious displays enough to file lawsuits.She still pulled the number out of her ass, and it may very well be greater than 1%, but it's got to be smaller than the percentage of all non-Christians. Most of us don't really give a shiat.

serial_crusher:impaler: She explained that courts ordered religious displays at public buildings to be removed "because we listen now to the less than 1 percent in society that feels this way." [citation needed]

1) Christians are not 99% of the population

To be fair, she wasn't just counting "non-Christians". She was specifically counting people who get butthurt about religious displays enough to file lawsuits.She still pulled the number out of her ass, and it may very well be greater than 1%, but it's got to be smaller than the percentage of all non-Christians. Most of us don't really give a shiat.

And then again many of us fully support these types of lawsuits but don't care enough to fight for them ourselves.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of non-Christian religions, or prohibiting the free exercise of Christian religions thereof; or abridging the freedom of Christian speech, or of the christian conservative press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble in a Christian Church, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances against non-Christians."

dletter:Except, it isn't "1%" like Gretchen the cheerleader says either. I think there was some poll that at least a 1/3 of people under 30 now self identify as "Non-religious", and that isn't even counting other religions as well.

I wouldn't consider non-religious the most accurate term since it sort of implies they're all atheists. A lot of the "non-religious" consider themselves spiritual and/or believers in Christ and whatnot but don't consider themselves part of a particular church or religion. I like how PBS's Religion and Ethics and Newsweekly labeled them as the "none of the aboves" based on their answer to surveys that don't have an option that really describes them.

theorellior:FloydA: "But the interesting thing about this is that the First Amendment has the Establishment Clause and it says there is no way that you can interrupt the establishment of a religion ...

Dafuq did I just read?

RepCons seem to think that the First Amendment means that the government cannot interfere in religion in any way at any time.

qorkfiend:theorellior: FloydA: "But the interesting thing about this is that the First Amendment has the Establishment Clause and it says there is no way that you can interrupt the establishment of a religion ...

Dafuq did I just read?

RepCons seem to think that the First Amendment means that the government cannot interfere in religion in any way at any time.

They think that the government cannot interfere in CHRISTIAN religion in any way at any time.

Philip Francis Queeg:qorkfiend: theorellior: FloydA: "But the interesting thing about this is that the First Amendment has the Establishment Clause and it says there is no way that you can interrupt the establishment of a religion ...

Dafuq did I just read?

RepCons seem to think that the First Amendment means that the government cannot interfere in religion in any way at any time.

They think that the government cannot interfere in CHRISTIAN religion in any way at any time.

Nah, they just think that anything non-Christian doesn't count as an established religion.

The U.S. Supreme Court has long held the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment prohibits the government from endorsing or promoting religious beliefs, including through public displays that convey a religious message.

As this is the way it has to be or we'll become Northern Ireland X 5000. Hell I've seen families fight over what Church they go to. I couldn't imagine the outcry if the Government favored a religion because then it would be over what flavor of that religion is predominant over policy.

Aren't Catholics something like 20% of the US population? Doesn't that make them a religious minority?

Given that there is no single religious group that can claim a majority (except maybe "Protestants", and if you don't know how stupid it is to claim them as a single religious body, welcome to America and don't fear the winged metal tubes whizzing overhead), EVERYONE's a minority.

Also, given that the Constitution says nothing about majority/minority status (and The Federalist Papers do a fair bit of explaining why not), a religion with 6 followers has the same rights as one with 6 billion.

theorellior:FloydA: "But the interesting thing about this is that the First Amendment has the Establishment Clause and it says there is no way that you can interrupt the establishment of a religion ...

Dafuq did I just read?

FTA: "Earlier in the segment, Fox News legal analyst Jeanine Pirro said the First Amendment prohibited government from preventing the establishment of religion - not prohibited government from the establishment of a religion."

Yep, their legal analyst doesn't even understand the first amendment. Man will they be embarrassed in the morning.

hillbillypharmacist:Fox News legal analyst Jeanine Pirro said the First Amendment prohibited government from preventing the establishment of religion - not prohibited government from the establishment of a religion.

That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

Yet, the Dominionists have manages to convince an alarmingly increasing number of people that the First Amendment protects Christians and only Christians and actually makes the US a Christian state, if only those evil Atheists, Muslims, Buddhists, and Jews that don't support Israel would let them.

These people are the greatest threat a free and just America has faced in decades.

serial_crusher:impaler: She explained that courts ordered religious displays at public buildings to be removed "because we listen now to the less than 1 percent in society that feels this way." [citation needed]

1) Christians are not 99% of the population

To be fair, she wasn't just counting "non-Christians". She was specifically counting people who get butthurt about religious displays enough to file lawsuits.She still pulled the number out of her ass, and it may very well be greater than 1%, but it's got to be smaller than the percentage of all non-Christians. Most of us don't really give a shiat.

If not for those 1% fox would have nothing to talk about all month. Although, I suppose they could go back to Benghazi.

What would Christmas be like without the annual Fox War on Christmas poutrage?

meat0918:hillbillypharmacist: Fox News legal analyst Jeanine Pirro said the First Amendment prohibited government from preventing the establishment of religion - not prohibited government from the establishment of a religion.

That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

Yet, the Dominionists have manages to convince an alarmingly increasing number of people that the First Amendment protects Christians and only Christians and actually makes the US a Christian state, if only those evil Atheists, Muslims, Buddhists, and Jews that don't support Israel would let them.

These people are the greatest threat a free and just America has faced in decades.

Decades? These people are a far greater threat than the Nazis or the Communists. They're trying to fundamentally redefine American culture and society to match their narrow-minded religious view. We haven't had the potential for massive damage like this since the Civil War.

qorkfiend:theorellior: FloydA: "But the interesting thing about this is that the First Amendment has the Establishment Clause and it says there is no way that you can interrupt the establishment of a religion ...

Dafuq did I just read?

RepCons seem to think that the First Amendment means that the government cannot interfere in religion in any way at any time.

Unless it benefits them, of course. I mean, government interference in religion's responsibility to pay their taxes, that's fine.

Dr Dreidel:Also, given that the Constitution says nothing about majority/minority status (and The Federalist Papers do a fair bit of explaining why not), a religion with 6 followers has the same rights as one with 6 billion.

Well, most people would call the "religion with six followers" a cult. Meanwhile, I say the only difference between a cult and a religion is size.

hillbillypharmacist:Fox News legal analyst Jeanine Pirro said the First Amendment prohibited government from preventing the establishment of religion - not prohibited government from the establishment of a religion.That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

So you're saying persecuted minorities should just up and leave the country, like the Puritans did? I doubt Gretchen Carlson would disagree with you?

No. He's saying that persecuted minorities have legal avenues of argument and complaint, so they should never feel that need. The persecuted minority in this case, by Gretchen's own admission, is atheists. They are exercising those legal avenues so that they don't have to leave.

Gretchen, and you, seem to be arguing that they should HAVE to leave the country, or simply shut up and deal. That's not American, your desperate attempts to spin otherwise notwithstanding.

"But the interesting thing about this is that the First Amendment has the Establishment Clause and it says there is no way that you can interrupt the establishment of a religion or prohibit the free exercise of religion," Pirro explained. "It doesn't give you freedom from religion, and that is what my objection is."

Because holy shiat, how can I properly enjoy Christmas unless every single government building or square inch of public land in my town is carpeted in Fake Plastic Baby Jesus and multicolored lights?